17:59:52 NateBarna * NateBarna Official Chat Starts
18:00:02 NateBarna University of Toronto Professor, Keith Stanovich joins ImmInst to discuss his new book, The Robot's Rebellion: Finding Meaning in the Age of Darwin, and ideas on the cognitive science of rational thought.
18:00:13 NateBarna
http://www.imminst.o...=ST&f=63&t=4028 18:00:29 NateBarna Thank you for joining us Professor Stanovich.
18:00:39 KeithS glad to be here
18:01:00 FutureQ Hello
18:01:10 NateBarna Has anyone read his book?
18:01:21 FutureQ Not yet
18:01:54 ddhewitt ddhewitt (~ddhewitt@[death to spam].c-24-2-135-104.client.comcast.net) has joined #immortal
18:01:55 NateBarna Keith: Have you considered how long you want to live?
18:01:58 FutureQ Keith could you summatize the main ghrust fo the book?
18:02:16 FutureQ summarize and thrust, sorry
18:02:24 Th3Hegem0n Th3Hegem0n (~Th3Hegem0@[death to spam].c-24-98-68-229.atl.client2.attbi.com) has quit IRC [Ping timeout]
18:02:52 KeithS the book describes how we can be more autonomous beings by using insights from cognitive science and evolutionary psychlology
18:03:14 John_Ventureville very interesting
18:03:19 FutureQ I see, we are the robots in the book then?
18:03:43 KeithS it describes cognitive strategies for enhancing the vehicvle's ( using richard dawkins terms) over those of genes and memes
18:03:50 KeithS yes, we are the robots of the book
18:03:50 John_Ventureville *especially since I don't want to be a unconscious slave to aspects of my evolutionary psychology*
18:04:07 KeithS john v has said it exactly
18:04:38 KeithS we are the runaway robots who escape the interests of the replicators and define our own interests
18:04:43 FutureQ Sla ve to no but cast off completely maybe not
18:04:50 John_Ventureville Keith, I'll be heading over to Amazon.com tonight to order a copy of your book
18:05:18 FutureQ replicators meaning dawkins' selfish genes
18:05:44 John_Ventureville I wish Eliezer, Robert Bradbury and Anders Sandberg were here, they would "eat" this up
18:05:55 KeithS yes, absolutely true. it is not a matter of overcoming ervery genetic interest, but determining which ones don't serve the vehicle-many do and when they do there is no problem
18:06:01 Automorphist Automorphist (Automorphi@[death to spam].12-216-15-80.client.mchsi.com) has joined #immortal
18:06:01 FutureQ Would breaking fee include reprogramming the death / brith cycle?
18:06:35 John_Ventureville Keith, please give us a variety of examples of what you mean by "genetic interest"
18:06:44 NateBarna While I agree that we can override our TASS, the nature of values are fundamentally arbitrary. Won't we have a sufficiently hard time determining values once we become too detached from TASS?
18:06:54 FutureQ IOW, extending human life/health span infdefinitely?
18:07:02 KeithS attempts at increasing longevity would indeed be classified as part of the robots rebellion because your genes have no interest in your survival beyond the reporductive years
18:07:43 John_Ventureville and so why do humans live past age 40 then?
18:08:02 FutureQ early rebellion John
18:08:17 John_Ventureville to be grandparents who give their own adult children an extra edge with their own offspring?
18:08:19 FutureQ eating better, medicine, etc.
18:08:21 KeithS Nate's question gets to a central theme of the book: that what is needed is a Neurathian project of self-critique. the Neurtahian metaphor forms a central part of the last 2 chapters.
18:08:54 Schaefer KeithS: Given that the rise of general intelligence itself was caused by genes, do you think it's really fair to say that our seemingly non-genetic actions are a rebellion against genes in general, instead of the domination of a few specific ones that have grown out of control?
18:09:18 NateBarna Is there any easy way to summarize the idea of the Neurathian project?
18:09:30 Schaefer KeithS: A man can say "I don't care what's genetically healthy. I intend to live forever, not reproduce, and go read Nietzsche!" but his desire to continue living is itself a product of EP.
18:10:10 KeithS Philosopher Otto Neurath (1932/33; see Quine, 1960, pp. 3-4) employed the metaphor of a boat which had some rotten planks. The best way to repair the planks would be to bring the boat ashore, stand on firm ground, and replace the planks. But what if the boat could not be brought ashore? Actually, the boat could still be repaired, but at some risk. We could repair the planks at sea by standing on some of the planks while repairing ot
18:11:16 NateBarna But what dictates the boat being necessary?
18:11:26 John_Ventureville Wil Durant once said of Nietzsche that he was very neurotic, but nothing which the love of a good woman couldn't cure! : )
18:11:34 FutureQ the boat = human body
18:11:37 FutureQ ?
18:12:07 KeithS The project could work--we could repair the boat without being on the firm foundation of ground. The project is not guaranteed, however, because we might choose to stand on a rotten plank.The project could work--we could repair the boat without being on the firm foundation of ground. The project is not guaranteed, however, because we might choose to stand on a rotten plank.The project could work--we could repair the boat without being
18:12:22 kzzch Nothing a neurotic msygonist needs more than the love of a good woman
18:12:22 KeithS The project could work--we could repair the boat without being on the firm foundation of ground. The project is not guaranteed, however, because we might choose to stand on a rotten plank.
18:12:29 Mind Mind (~Mind@[death to spam].c68.191.162.41.stp.wi.charter.com) has joined #immortal
18:12:42 kzzch Hey Mind, how goes?
18:12:44 KeithS Science proceeds in just this manner--each experiment testing certain assumptions but leaving others considered as fixed and foundational.
18:13:17 KeithS At a later time, these temporarily-foundational assumptions might be directly tested in another experiment where they would be considered contingent and optional with other assumptions being treated as foundational.
18:13:22 Mind look at the private chat Kzzzch
18:13:41 KeithS Likewise, our examination of whether the memes we host are serving our interests must be essentially a Neurathian project.
18:13:54 Mind Neurathian?
18:14:03 KeithS We can conduct certain tests assuming that certain memeplexes (e.g., science, logic, rationality) are foundational, but at a later time we might want to bring these latter memeplexes into question too.
18:14:18 Schaefer Mind: one minute. I'll paste his earlier lines for you.
18:14:24 KeithS The more comprehensively we have tested our interlocking memeplexes, the more confident we can be that we have not let a meme virus enter our mindware
18:14:43 KeithS Alternatively, and more realistically, we might modify portions of memeplexes that prove unable to pass logical and empirical tests once they are considered provisional.
18:15:08 KeithS Just as computer scientists have proven that there is no conceptual problem with the idea of self-modifying computer software, rationality is mindware with the capability of modifying itself.
18:15:25 KeithS Circularity is escaped because we are in a Neurathian enterprise highly similar to the logic of modern science which is nonfoundationalist but progresses nonetheless
18:15:26 Schaefer meme viruses being any memes that don't serve our interests?
18:15:35 KeithS yes
18:16:59 NateBarna But one question that continues to underly the memeplexes is whether the boat is necessary? But since it's contingent, anyone repairing their planks can do so however they want to and would have to stick to a personal morality rather than trying to objectively necessitate an ethics.
18:17:04 lazlo One man's *viral* meme is a Freedom Fighter's Terrorist>
18:17:07 KeithS in the book, i talk about 4 criteria for meme evaluation
18:17:29 John_Ventureville what are they?
18:17:42 KeithS 1. Avoid installing memes that are harmful to the vehicle physically.
18:17:57 KeithS 2. Regarding memes that are beliefs, seek to install only memes that are true--that is, that reflect the way the world actually is.
18:18:15 KeithS 3. Regarding memes that are desires, seek to install only memes that do not preclude other memeplexes becoming installed in the future.4. Avoid memes that resist evaluation.
18:18:39 Schaefer Do you believe these four rules are more-or-less innate?
18:18:48 KeithS no
18:18:54 Rotaerk_ Rotaerk_ (~Rotaerk@[death to spam].129.252.69.20) has joined #immortal
18:18:59 lazlo Is this *robot* mind capable of self defense?
18:19:25 KeithS they are themselves cultural constructions-developed by a Neurathian process
18:20:08 Schaefer Hrm.
18:20:15 Rotaerk Rotaerk (~Rotaerk@[death to spam].129.252.69.20) has quit IRC [Ping timeout]
18:20:20 NateBarna Keith: Who should apply these criteria, and why?
18:21:00 KeithS my book concentrates on applying them at the personal level but I can conceive of social entities applying them as well
18:21:28 KeithS i will explore the latter in a subsequent book
18:21:40 NateBarna I agree with personal application.
18:21:49 KeithS but in the last chapter where I discuss metarationality social issues comeinto play, particularly markets
18:22:07 lightowl lightowl (~thor@[death to spam].port50.ds1-khk.adsl.cybercity.dk) has quit IRC [Quit: ]
18:22:34 KeithS for example, markets often make more difficult a critique of our first order desires because markets are so good at fulfilling unexamined first order desires
18:23:49 ddhewitt ddhewitt (~ddhewitt@[death to spam].c-24-2-135-104.client.comcast.net) has quit IRC [Ping timeout]
18:24:06 KeithS for example, adaptive preferences are those that are easy to fulfill in the particular environment in which the agent lives.
18:24:20 NateBarna Keith: Beyond trying to set moral standards of a presumably sophisticated individual, what sort of dangers are we trying avoid in recognizing the TASS/analytic distinction?
18:25:16 hoffman hoffman (~hoffman@[death to spam].dial81-131-200-135.in-addr.btopenworld.com) has joined #immortal
18:25:20 KeithS most generally, a truer understanding of why we behave like we do
18:26:23 KeithS this plays out in the many examples from the Kahneman and Tversky literature such as why we tend to honor sunk costs and to irrationally react to the nominal value of financial sums rather than the real value
18:27:47 KeithS and it plays out in more deeper and profound behaviors such as our treatment of disability and problems in modern society that stem from male sexual proprietariness, I'm thinking of the Margo Wilson work. these are some of the examples used in the book
18:28:39 NateBarna Keith: Have you ever given any consideration regarding how long you genuinely want to live?
18:29:03 KeithS one discussion i like in the book is the one in the last chapter about how the 2 process distinction interacts with market forces
18:29:11 FutureQ I'm disabled, I'm oging to have to see what that's abut and how true it rings to my experience.
18:30:08 KeithS on disability and difference see the last section of chapter 5 What Follows Fron the Fact that Mother Nature Isn't Nive
18:30:16 KeithS Nice
18:30:31 KeithS I'd like to live as long as possible given good health
52 John_Ventureville what do you think of cryonics?
18:31:13 John_Ventureville have you ever carefully studied the subject?
18:31:34 KeithS cryonics is not something I've gotten into
18:32:13 John_Ventureville as we like to say around here "there's no guarantee, but it sure beats the alternative!"
18:32:17 FutureQ do you thinkit useless and non workable?
18:32:46 KeithS no, haven't studied it at all
18:33:13 FutureQ how old are you if I may ask?
18:33:20 John_Ventureville you may want to check out the Alcor.com resources page sometime
18:33:23 KeithS on the earlier question on the TASS/analytical distinction, i think it is critical for understanding meme evaluationin our information saturated society
18:33:31 Automorphist In the boat analogy earlier, does the boat itself, the vehicle if you will, constitute not the physical body but instead the memeplexes that make the individual... I for one have a hard time drawing a distinction between personal identity and memes such as language, culture, etc...
18:33:36 KeithS kes is 53
18:33:55 John_Ventureville former MIT professor Ralph Merkle has a great article (quite long) explaining why he believes cryonics will in the end work
18:34:16 KeithS automorphist is talking aobut what i term in chapter 7 the coadapted meme paradox
18:34:22 John_Ventureville "The Molecular Repair of the Brain"
18:34:47 NateBarna Keith, right. We can make better decisions.
18:35:15 KeithS many desires, particularly those operating as high-level intentional states in the analytic system, are memes--as are many beliefs
18:35:30 KeithS If we understand what a meme is, it immediately becomes apparent why we must focus on broad theory of rationality--one that critiques the beliefs and desires that go into the instrumental calculations
18:35:31 FutureQ At 53, don't wait too long to chec into the only lifeboat we yet have for the ultimate rebellion.
18:35:44 John_Ventureville lol
18:35:47 John_Ventureville very true
18:35:55 KeithS Otherwise, the meme goals are no better than the pre-installed gene goals.
18:35:55 Schaefer "Many" beliefs? Are there any beliefs that are not memes?
18:36:14 KeithS Instrumental rationality, as classically defined, serves current goals without inquiring where those goals came from.
18:36:33 KeithS Generally speaking, we want to make sure that the memes we are carrying around were reflectively acquired and are good for us as hosts, as vehicles.
18:36:44 Automorphist Would even your personality be in some way forged by memes? Where do the memeplexes end and the "self" begin... or is there a clear line at all?
18:36:52 KeithS But Ògood for the vehicleÓ takes on a recursive flavor here if the vehicle includes already-installed memes.
18:37:07 KeithS This makes it seem like what is being asked for are merely good co-adapted memes--memes that cohere well with the memes already resident.
18:37:21 KeithS Thus, we seem right back at an instrumental view, because we would merely be accommodating previously existing desires. We cannot go back to square one before a person had any memes.
18:37:38 KeithS A personÕs interests at a particular point in time are in part determined by the memes already resident in the brain.
18:37:39 hoffman hoffman (~hoffman@[death to spam].dial81-131-200-135.in-addr.btopenworld.com) has quit IRC [Quit: JWIRC applet]
18:37:40 hoffman hoffman (~hoffman@[death to spam].dial81-131-200-135.in-addr.btopenworld.com) has joined #immortal
18:37:56 Mind Mind (~Mind@[death to spam].c68.191.162.41.stp.wi.charter.com) has quit IRC [Ping timeout]
18:37:56 KeithS If those memes are already maladaptive for the vehicle, then using them to evaluate the new instrumental needs would just amount to requiring newly acquired memes to be co-adapted with the previously acquired maladaptive ones. This I will call the co-adapted meme paradox
18:38:18 KeithS I think that there is no foundationalist answer to this problem--that is, no totally neutral stance from which memes can be evaluated.
18:38:30 KeithS Nevertheless, the memeplexes of science and rationality can still be used to restructure our own goal hierarchies in ways that serve the host. The project will be a highly Neurathian bootstrapping endeavor.
18:38:43 KeithS Some memeplexes must be used to evaluate other memes. These original memeplexes must then become the subjects of evaluation using other resident memes. Science progresses despite being confined to a similar mind-twisting and Rube Goldberg-like logic.
18:39:14 KeithS there is no clear line between the self and memes
